+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Aggathon's Rage Bar Ep 12 - BlizzCon Part 1

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,412

    Aggathon's Rage Bar Ep 12 - BlizzCon Part 1


    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,937
    I hate stupid people too! It's just that on average people are stupid.
    Harsh Words and Steel: A Protection Warrior Guide
    MoP RPS Calculator

    Hunters, Just get a Sporebat, most LFRs will be missing that buff.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    19
    I disagree with 20 man being the optimal size. Its too close to 25 and has the same logistical issues. If they are going to change it I'd much rather it be 15 man.

    I would like to have blizzard answer why they chose 20 when GC has said in the past 15 was the best size. The Blizzcon answers are pretty cop out. You can still assume all classes in a 15 man.

    Side note: Allowing cross-realm normal/heroic is going to kill any guild that isn't mythic imo. There is no need for a guild anymore when you can just open raid anything else on your own schedule.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    I think it's more than just "well the probably have every class", it also has a lot to do with loot division and flexibility of a raid to have enough tools to tackle mechanics.

    Also, where did GC say 15 man was the best size?
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    Also I think it's a math thing.

    2 10M HC guilds = 1 20M Mythic guild

    2 10 HC guilds = 1.5 20M Mythic guilds

    Causes even more turmoil in the numbers game, and then 25 raiders are LOSING 10 raiders also then, which doesn't help that math at all.

    I will admit I could see 15 player raids working instead of 20, and I haven't thought about this a whole lot and really put the math to the paper for loot distribution and probabilities and class makeup, but just sort of "gut feeling" with a little bit of math I think 20 man is better than 15.
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Karlsruhe/Germany
    Posts
    4,005
    It also just so happens that the weighted average of 10 and 25 is 20 (well, 20.7)

    ((10*10)+(25*25))/(10+25) = 725/35 = 20.7

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    19

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    I think it's more than just "well the probably have every class", it also has a lot to do with loot division and flexibility of a raid to have enough tools to tackle mechanics.
    I think at the mythic level you can assume people will build their raid around having all classes where it is optimal*. My guild runs a 12 man roster as it is. I would assume that a 15 man would still have 2 or 3 extra.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelyne View Post
    Adding people to a roster is usually less painful than having to cut a bunch of people. I can definitely understand why they would rather have 10 man guilds add 10 than 25 man guilds cut 10. He seems to think that 15 man would be a last resort, doesn't seem that they are there yet =)

    a LOT of 10 man guilds try to run with a solid 10 man roster, and especially no medium and lower pop servers, it can be REALLY hard to have the "perfect comp". When you just need more people and a smaller size isn't an option, you might be surprised at the ability to recruit, ESPECIALLY with all of the coalesced realms happening, and that you can recruit by doing Heroic (which I believe will not share a lockout) and can do it cross-realm for free first.
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1
    the real problem my guild is having with this 20m mystic raiding is we have 3 10m cores and 1 25m so we have the numbers to do it but its now a time problem one of our cores raids 3-4 times a week the others including the 25m can only raid 6 hours a week so now we have to decide are we going to lose our 3-4 times a week core or do we hold them back until the other 10m are up to there them. i have had other people say will when MoD drops you need to be lvl 100 to raid and you will not have heroic gear so everyone will be equal but when the others can only play at those time they still will not be 100 when that 10m gets to 100

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Marina del Rey, CA
    Posts
    3,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    Adding people to a roster is usually less painful than having to cut a bunch of people. I can definitely understand why they would rather have 10 man guilds add 10 than 25 man guilds cut 10. He seems to think that 15 man would be a last resort, doesn't seem that they are there yet =)
    Er? What? You HAVE 10 people to cut all you have to do is make a decision. When you're trying to DOUBLE your roster...it's not just "ok, we're taking these guys", it's hitting forums w/recruiting messages, spamming trade w/recruiting messages, filtering through apps, interviewing apps, and FINALLY making a decision about each one. How is it EASIER to do all of that than just making a decision?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gravy
    Any plan that doesn't call for the end of the world or the extinction of the human race isn't a good plan

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Karlsruhe/Germany
    Posts
    4,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Ion View Post
    Er? What? You HAVE 10 people to cut all you have to do is make a decision. When you're trying to DOUBLE your roster...it's not just "ok, we're taking these guys", it's hitting forums w/recruiting messages, spamming trade w/recruiting messages, filtering through apps, interviewing apps, and FINALLY making a decision about each one. How is it EASIER to do all of that than just making a decision?
    On top of that, all the 25 man guild will have to do is see which members are quitting, and say "OK, we've got our roster".

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Ion View Post
    Er? What? You HAVE 10 people to cut all you have to do is make a decision. When you're trying to DOUBLE your roster...it's not just "ok, we're taking these guys", it's hitting forums w/recruiting messages, spamming trade w/recruiting messages, filtering through apps, interviewing apps, and FINALLY making a decision about each one. How is it EASIER to do all of that than just making a decision?
    Perhaps I should have clarified: from an emotional/drama perspective. Yes the physical act of recruiting and effort to find more people is more difficult.
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Marina del Rey, CA
    Posts
    3,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    Perhaps I should have clarified: from an emotional/drama perspective. Yes the physical act of recruiting and effort to find more people is more difficult.
    Might be true (to like...people or something) in the middle of an expansion when your roster is set and your group is going...but at the beginning of one? When churn is almost certainly going to happen anyway? You might end up with a slightly larger bench...but there's probably a good chance that you'll just have a few people leave and essentially nothing else will change at all.

    What they're essentially doing is saying that 10 man was NEVER valid raiding and that everyone who's doing it now is a second class PvE citizen.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gravy
    Any plan that doesn't call for the end of the world or the extinction of the human race isn't a good plan

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,937
    Which is a shame, since if comes down to raiding mythic with 20 or normal/heroic with friends, i'd rather just 10 with friends.
    Harsh Words and Steel: A Protection Warrior Guide
    MoP RPS Calculator

    Hunters, Just get a Sporebat, most LFRs will be missing that buff.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    Perhaps I should have clarified: from an emotional/drama perspective. Yes the physical act of recruiting and effort to find more people is more difficult.
    Well take into account that some current GM/Read Leaders don't have the time/will to manage 20 people you are going to have entire guilds collapsing. Talk about drama - My guild started at 25 and I about lost my mind managing it. We dropped to tens back in firelands and ever since i've been able to handle balancing guild management with the rest of my life.

    We cleared normal SoO in 3 weeks. We are currently 7/14 H. None of us wants to stop playing together but at the same time we don't want to sit around without content for months at a time. I have a kid coming in march and I told my guild I just can't lead it with these changes. (Lets be honest here being a Raid Leader/GM is not a job most people are willing to do. So its not surprising there isn't someone jumping to take my place.) We all live across the country and losing me is essentially going to kill us. I don't see how blizzard sees this as a good thing because I am sure we are not the only 10 man in this situation.

    There are 5 times the number of heroic 10 guilds than there are heroic 25. Its obvious givin the choice what format the majority of players doing heroic content prefer. Imo that alone should be a red flag to force 20 mans down out throat. At risk of repeating myself - I firmly believe that if the format needs to be leveled it should be 15 man at the largest.

    Also what about people who's computers handle 10man fine but lag out at 20 man?

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    29
    I like the feel of the larger raid group but have mainly done 10 man after BC. I really hope they keep it at 20. As for GM's managing things what about officers, we had a few officers two for recruitment two raid organisers, two raid leaders and the GM. Perhaps with the server merging the larger guilds will develop again. We had two 25 man raid groups when they first changed from 40 man raids. We did have a lot of social players that moved into raiding.I love the way aggathons rage bar is developing so nice to read all the post

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    At the top, see Lore's post here on the matter: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...0094?page=5#86



    There are 5 times the number of heroic 10 guilds than there are heroic 25. Its obvious givin the choice what format the majority of players doing heroic content prefer. Imo that alone should be a red flag to force 20 mans down out throat. At risk of repeating myself - I firmly believe that if the format needs to be leveled it should be 15 man at the largest. man raiding.
    Keep in mind, not everyone does 10 man raiding because they prefer it. Since Blizzard took so long to do server merges, a lot of servers didn't really have the population to support 25. And there are a lot of raiders that don't have an allegiance to 10s or 25s (like myself) that just found a guild that suited their time commitment/raiding philosophy first, and didn't particularly care if it was 10 man or 25 man.

    10 mans definitely do follow the path of lease resistance. You are definitely right, it is far easier to manage 10 people than 25 (or 20). I could not do it by myself when I was leading 25s, I definitely had to have support staff to help me out and it made my job a lot easier. But that's getting away from the point. My point is that even if there are 5x as many heroic raiders in 10 man as there are in 20 (which btw, I think that stat is skewed, I think the last numbers I saw on it were something like 35% of hardcore raiders were 25 man, 65% 10 man, which would mean that it's about 1.86x as many 10 man raiders as 25) that doesn't necessarily mean all of them are going to quit the game because of 20 mans or that they just HAVE to do 10 mans instead of 20s.

    10 man raiding has become the path of least resistance. I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing, just that it is.


    I don't see how blizzard sees this as a good thing because I am sure we are not the only 10 man in this situation.
    See Lore's post above. They say they are well aware that this is going to happen. I mean, let's say there are 2000 raiders (just for simple math), that means that with 10 mans there are 200 guilds. Now if the same number of people want to raid and raids are now 20 man, that means there will now be 100 guilds. HALF of all hardcore 10M guilds are probably going to break up over this. Again, I'm not saying this is a good thing, and neither is blizzard. They're saying it was a very tough decision but a necessary evil. This is just the math.

    Also what about people who's computers handle 10man fine but lag out at 20 man?
    My 5 year old computer can still do 25 mans, albeit roughly. May be time to upgrade something, especially with the updated graphics coming in WoD.

    They also probably have pretty good computer hardware statistics about this due to beta opt-ins. I bet that was a calculated measurement they're not real concerned about.



    Also: what exactly is the biggest difference between leading 15 people and leading 20 people? Why do you feel you could lead 10 or 15 but not 20? I guess what I'm asking here is what are all your reasons why you think if they go with one format that that format should be 15 mans instead of 20 mans.

    And one last point I want to add: with 11 classes I don't really think you can guarantee every 15 man guild has all classes covered, especially with multiples of classes due to hybrids. You can with 20 man raids.


    Edit: OH YEAH! And one more thing! There is currently a massive recruitment disparity. There are actually too many guilds. There are far more guilds recruiting than there are players looking for guilds. This is an issue that going to a 20 man format helps alleviate. It makes it really hard to recruit even for 10 man guilds, and REALLY hard to start up a new guild, especially on a lower pop server. If I have to server transfer why would I go to a low pop server to start a new guild that hasn't been around for a while when I could go to Illidan and join a guild that's been around for 3 years and is on a server I probably wouldn't have to transfer off of to find a new guild?
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,344
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    And one last point I want to add: with 11 classes I don't really think you can guarantee every 15 man guild has all classes covered, especially with multiples of classes due to hybrids. You can with 20 man raids.
    Bring the player, not the class.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ion
    Damn old people, screwin' with my grind.
    Mists of Pandaria Protection Warrior Spreadsheet
    Warlords of Draenor One Minute Field Guides

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Airowird View Post
    Bring the player, not the class.
    Why not bring all the players and all the classes?

    As much as we want to say bring the player not the class, clearly that hasn't worked out because some classes just make fights easier. If Blizz is saying "we want to design encounters around the assumption that every class is in the raid" then "bring the player not the class" is going out the window. Which frankly, is not really true anyways right now, so... whatever. Like to an extent you may not have pally tank or a fury warrior, but you want someone that can rallying cry or tranquility or whatever.
    [Today 09:38 AM] Reev: The older I get, the more I think those Greek philosophers were just annoying hipsters.
    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts